LSAT 117 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q16

LR Question 16 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Moralist: Immoral actions are those that harm …

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption

CONCLUSION: People act immorally because they’re unaware of some consequences of their actions, not because they have a character defect.

REASONING: Immoral actions eventually harm the actor.

ANALYSIS: The argument goes:

• Immoral actions eventually harm the person doing them.
• So immoral people must not realize that consequence.
• Therefore, they act from ignorance rather than bad character.

There’s a gap there. The missing idea is that people who act immorally don’t intend the eventual harm to themselves.

Why? Because if they did intend that harm, then they wouldn’t be ignorant of that consequence. They would know what they were doing.

So the conclusion that immoral actions are done through ignorance would fall apart.

___________

1. The argument isn’t about whether people should be held morally responsible. It’s about why they act immorally in the first place.
2. This reverses the issue. The stimulus says immoral actions harm others and eventually harm the actor. It does not need a rule about when self-harm also causes harm to others.
3. Tempting. This says knowingly harming others would require a character defect. But the moralist doesn’t need to prove that immoral actors lack character defects entirely. The claim is only that they act immorally because of ignorance, not because of that defect. So even if we negated C, the argument would still survive.
   Negation: Some people can knowingly perform actions that eventually harm others without having a character defect.
4. CORRECT. If immoral actors intended the eventual harm to themselves, they would not be ignorant of that consequence. The moralist needs to assume they do not intend it, so that ignorance can explain their immoral behavior.
   Negation: Some people who act immorally and eventually harm themselves do intend that harm.
5. This is also a trap. It says that anyone who knowingly harms themselves has character defects. But the moralist doesn’t need to show that immoral actors have or lack character defects. The claim is only that they act immorally because of ignorance of some consequences. They could still have a character defect for some other reason, so this isn’t necessary.
   Negation: Some people knowingly harm themselves despite not having a character defect.